Quick Links

Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA

The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.

Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Cosmos, with Neil DeGrasse Tyson - In which we learn that FOX is not the same as Fox News

Posts

This kind of thing, right here? When people don't understand the science behind a problem and comprehend it only in vague terms of "this stuff is bad", yet still feel the need to hold forth on it? This is why we're still using coal instead of fission plants.

No, it's really not. I linked to the reasons that the U.S. doesn't use fission plants earlier, and it has nothing to do with fear mongering or a failure to understand science.

The reasons we don't use fission plants are economic in the immediate sense, yes--but those economic reasons are tied to political reasons that are ultimately dependent on the perception of fission among the general population and the politicians representing them. Fission powerplants have a long project cycle compared to fossil fuels, which creates substantial financial risk. Some of that is ultimately technical in nature (an advance in renewable power could obviate your plant before you've made a profit), but there is also substantial regulatory or 'political' risk.

In other words, the unfavorable investment climate for fission power is in large part due to the way it's perceived by the public and by lawmakers.

To be honest, I'm not even sure that this is a battle worth fighting anymore, or that it can be won. Maybe Tyson is right to simply ignore it in favor of pushing solar. I am not ready to give up on fusion, though. I need that enthalpy for my goddamn spaceship.

I hope ITER proves to be viable; i was very excited for the project, but all of the delays & cost overruns have really buoyed the critics of the project I know that have been skeptical it could ever work from the get-go. :|

Fortunately, the possibility of practical fusion generators is so compelling that it's the goal of [an admittedly small segment of each of the following] militaries, governments, entrepreneurs, and activists. Practical fusion power lets you do ridiculous things like vaporize dirt to mine gold; it's the end-all, be-all of fueled energy technologies*. That's why there are quite a few parallel efforts toward achieving it aside from ITER.

*yeah, fine, antimatter reactors could yield more power, but you can't exactly harvest antimatter; you have to make it yourself.

...I hope that, if someone ever finds that record, they are never able to figure-out whatever it is that the whales were saying. :|

But it would be funny if they guess and come back greeting us with the sounds of whales that are just insults and comments about fish

I am torn about a new season
It did the what was intended to do in gathering interest in science. It showed how regressive some people really are. The bit about the lead pollution and the dog showing the weather over time as he walked along the beach were both very interesting
But if they did a new season what would it be about? as showing certain other things about science would show even the little things are insanely complex
I then thought they could do it on our System? but it's been done and was depressingly simple

I think this is just a one time deal, not something to expect another season of.

If they did do another season, I demand a mars episode! And if we're doing mars, fuck it, do a full episode on every planet. And maybe one dedicated to the Oort Cloud.

Also, I like them to do an episode talking about the future stuff that we were given artistic impressions of: hydroponic skyscraper farms, long range space vehicles, highly developed rapid transit systems, etc.

I think this is just a one time deal, not something to expect another season of.

If they did do another season, I demand a mars episode! And if we're doing mars, fuck it, do a full episode on every planet. And maybe one dedicated to the Oort Cloud.

Also, I like them to do an episode talking about the future stuff that we were given artistic impressions of: hydroponic skyscraper farms, long range space vehicles, highly developed rapid transit systems, etc.

There was a thing on Youtube I watched last night, a panel (well, more of an interview, because it was just him) with Dr. Tyson at SXSW just before Cosmos premiered. He loves Europa. At one point he got a joke in where he noted that if Europa turned out to have life, we'd have to call them Europeans.

Sadly, the whole thing's about an hour, and I didn't note the timestamp.

On week 1 it did 5 million on Fox and 3.5 million on the cable networks.

It then had a gradual decline the next few weeks in to the 3.5 million range which is where it stayed for the Majority and the rest of the series.

Now the question is... Is that good?

That's actually kind of horrible. Other factors that come into play are thing like how lucrative advertisers think the show will be for them (hahaha no), none of which off of the top of my head Cosmos strikes a chord with.

Cosmos seems like the sort of thing that will find its natural audience on Bluray and streaming rather than broadcast. It's not "invite the friends over, bring chips" event TV that something like Game of Thrones is, and there's no pressure to keep up because it's not like you can be spoiled about it the next day at work.

Cosmos seems like the sort of thing that will find its natural audience on Bluray and streaming rather than broadcast. It's not "invite the friends over, bring chips" event TV that something like Game of Thrones is, and there's no pressure to keep up because it's not like you can be spoiled about it the next day at work.

DUDE IT TURNS OUT THE RED SUN TOTALLY KILLS EARTH AT THE END OMG

It's true, but this also sort-of defeats the purpose of the program: to reach a wide audience.

As much as Cosmos might interest & even educate some niche Internet audience, that isn't the crowd that someone wanting to popularize science is aiming for. It's why Bill Nye still does a lot of TV stuff, for example.

If cosmos pulled 3.5 million viewers, that easily places it as the second most watched show of the entire evening, behind Game of Thrones (which honestly is sucking all the air out of the room with over 6 million eyeballs live at the same timeslot).

There is zero way fox is mad about the ratings.

edit: though maybe next time if the do a season 2 don't run it when such a juggernaut of a show is opposite it that lots of nerdy folks (like me) enjoy watching as well.

Ok so, started watching this on Hulu last night and watched the first three episodes. Very cool stuff.

Most of what was presented, I knew in some form or fashion, but I love watching science.

Went ahead and ordered the blu-ray of Cosmos and Planet Earth. (Would have ordered Blue Planet too, but the comments about the underwater footage being just upscaled standard def made me hold off this time.)

Also, for anyone itching for more Science, Neil deGrasse Tyson, or both; there's a six episode series called The Inexplicable Universe with Neil deGrasse Tyson up on netflix. It goes into some interesting stuff.

Cosmos seems like the sort of thing that will find its natural audience on Bluray and streaming rather than broadcast. It's not "invite the friends over, bring chips" event TV that something like Game of Thrones is, and there's no pressure to keep up because it's not like you can be spoiled about it the next day at work.

DUDE IT TURNS OUT THE RED SUN TOTALLY KILLS EARTH AT THE END OMG

It's true, but this also sort-of defeats the purpose of the program: to reach a wide audience.

As much as Cosmos might interest & even educate some niche Internet audience, that isn't the crowd that someone wanting to popularize science is aiming for. It's why Bill Nye still does a lot of TV stuff, for example.

If you think that it wont be replayed constantly through years of science classes like Bill Nye's show has been, then you're fooling yourself.